DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 10-29 of U.S. Application No. 18/012,088 filed on 12/21/2022 were examined. Examiner filed a non-final rejection on 01/02/2025.
Applicant filed remarks and amendments on 03/18/2025. Claims 10-13 and 25-29 were amended. Claims 10-29 were examined. Examiner filed a final rejection on 05/30/2025.
Applicant filed RCE on 09/02/2025. Claims 10, 11, 25, 26, 27, and 28 were amended. Claims 10-29 were examined. Examiner filed a non-final rejection on 09/26/2025.
Applicant filed remarks and amendments on 12/16/2025. Claims 10, 25, 28 and 29 were amended. Claims 10-29 are presently pending and presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the claim rejections under 35 USC 103: Applicant's arguments filed 12/16/2025 with respect to Shukla et al. (EP3442192A1) in view of Oren et al. (US6871265B1) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 10, 25 and 28, The applicant argues that “In general: Shukla only discloses a timeout counter, but this counter only affects, whether the connection is terminated or not. Specifically, it is disclosed that ‘In step 230 it can be evaluated whether a timeout counter expires. For example, the CPU 120 can monitor a corresponding timeout counter started after establishing the connection between source 152 and 162 in step 214. If this timeout counter expires, the CPU 120 terminates the connection in step 250.’ (see [0071]). No additional functionality of the counter is disclosed in Shukla.”
However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees, this argument is not persuasive, the rejection is based on the combination of Shukla and Oren, not Shukla alone. Shukla teaches a stateful firewall in a vehicle network using CAM to monitor and filter data transmissions between network members, including terminating connections based on counters for anomalous or unauthorized activity. Oren is combined to teach additional counter functionality for tracking hits on data patterns in a memory (TCAM), updating counters and timestamps on hits, and triggering actions (e.g., flushing for analysis) when thresholds are exceeded, which would be obvious to incorporate into Shukla’s vehicle network to detect manipulated or external control units by analyzing deviations in traffic patterns. Citation from Shukla ([0071]): “In step 230 it can be evaluated whether a timeout counter expires. For example, the CPU 120 can monitor a corresponding timeout counter started after establishing the connection between source 152 and 162 in step 214. If this timeout counter expires, the CPU 120 terminates the connection in step 250.” This supports Shukla’s teaching of counters for terminating connections (defense routine) on deviations. Citation from Oren (col. 5, ln. 26-33): “This key is then used to perform a lookup operation in the TCAM. If there is a hit (e.g., a found condition), then by type, packet, and/or other counters, and possibly timestamp information are updated in a parallel SRAM for this entry. If there is a miss (e.g., a not found condition), then a new entry is added to the TCAM. If the number of free entries falls below a certain threshold, then an ‘old’ entry is flushed.” This supports Oren’s teaching of counters updated on hits with timestamps, and threshold-based actions, which in combination with Shukla teaches the claimed counter for hit signals leading to defense.
The applicant also argues that “Thus, Oren discloses different scenarios, when the entries are flushed from the dynamic set of entries. But none of these scenarios includes the scenario, where the value of the counter and the last data packet, that incremented the counter, are forwarded to the microprocessor for further analysis in the case the counter value itself exceeds a certain threshold. In contrary, the counter according to Oren only serves for collecting the statistics and has no influence on when the entries are flushed. Further, Oren does not disclose to use this counter value to identify a manipulated control unit nor to use this counter value to identify an external control unit not originally included in the vehicle.”.
However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees, this argument is not persuasive, Oren teaches flushing entries and associated statistics (including counters and timestamps) when thresholds are exceeded, which includes forwarding the data for analysis by a collector (microprocessor), and the statistics include values corresponding to hit counts on data patterns. The claim does not require the threshold to be solely on the counter value; the combination with Shukla’s vehicle network firewall teaches identifying unauthorized or manipulated units by detecting deviations in traffic (e.g., unexpected connections or patterns). Citation from Oren (col. 5, ln. 1-4): “When the number of dynamic entries exceeds a threshold value, one or more of the dynamic entries and their corresponding Statistics values are flushed to a netflow/Statistics collector.” Citation from Shukla ([0065]): “After establishing the connection between source 152 and destination 162 and after transferring the rules to the TCAM 130, in step 230 it is evaluated whether a termination condition is met and whether to monitor traffic between the connected source 152 and destination 162 in step 240 or whether to terminate their connection in step 250.”.
The applicant also argues that “More specifically, neither Shukla nor Oren, either alone or in combination, discloses or suggests at least the features recited in amended independent claim 10 of indicating, by at least one counter, a respective counter value corresponding to how often the hit signal was generated based on at least one two predetermined data patterns, wherein the hit signal is generated when any one of the two predetermined data patterns is recognized by the associative memory; storing, in a readout memory, analysis data including the respective last data packet, the counter value, and a timestamp of the respectively last increase of the counter value for each of the at least one counter; reading, by the microprocessor, the respectively current analysis data via a data interface; determining, by the microprocessor, based on transmission schedule data, which describes an intended transmission scheme of the control devices, by a predetermined comparison scheme, and initiating, by the microprocessor, the predetermined defense routine when the analysis data deviates from the transmission scheme; and controlling functionality of the motor vehicle in response to the predetermined defense routine comprising restricting functionality of the motor vehicle.”.
However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees, this argument is not persuasive, the combination teaches these features: Oren teaches the counter for hit signals, storing with last packet and timestamp, reading for analysis, determining deviation, and initiating response (flushing as defense). Shukla teaches the vehicle context with restricting functionality via connection termination. Citation from Oren (col. 5, ln. 26-33): “This key is then used to perform a lookup operation in the TCAM. If there is a hit (e.g., a found condition), then by type, packet, and/or other counters, and possibly timestamp information are updated in a parallel SRAM for this entry. If there is a miss (e.g., a not found condition), then a new entry is added to the TCAM. If the number of free entries falls below a certain threshold, then an ‘old’ entry is flushed.” Citation from Shukla ([0071]): “In step 230 it can be evaluated whether a timeout counter expires. For example, the CPU 120 can monitor a corresponding timeout counter started after establishing the connection between source 152 and 162 in step 214. If this timeout counter expires, the CPU 120 terminates the connection in step 250.”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 10-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shukla et al. (EP3442192A1) in view of Oren et al. (US6871265B1), hereinafter referred to as Shukla and Oren respectively.
Regarding claims 10, 25 and 28, Shukla discloses A method for controlling a motor vehicle, comprising: realizing a vehicle functionality by exchanging data packets between multiple devices which are coupled to each other via a data network in the motor vehicle (“A first network member 141 is connected with the network switch 110 at a port 140 and can for example be a first subdomain 141. This subdomain 141 can itself comprise several members which are connected with each other by means of a communication link 145, e.g. a CAN Bus or Ethernet. The subdomain 141 can comprise a domain controller 142, e.g. a motor control unit, several sensors 143 and actuators 144.” [0042]);
monitoring data traffic between control devices of a motor vehicle (“After the connection is established, the CAM is used to monitor data or data units to be transmitted between the connected network members.” [0011]):, the control devices being connected via a data network, which includes a switch device, in which physical ports for receiving and for transmitting data packets are interconnected via a switch circuit (“Particularly, each network member is connected with a different port of the network switch.” [0007]), the method comprising:
associating target port data with a respective data packet, which is received via one of the ports, by a network processor by an associative memory, at least one of the ports being selected as a respective target port depending on the target port data, and the received data packet being transmitted to at least one target port by the switch circuit (“he network switch comprises a processor unit and a content addressable memory (CAM), particularly a ternary content addressable memory (TCAM). The processor unit can be a single central processing unit (CPU) or a multi-core processor with two or more CPUs. In the following description, the processing is also referred to as "switch CPU".” [0007]),
the associating including:
storing, in the associative memory, at least one predetermined data pattern of a packet type to be monitored and/or detected and/or data content to be detected (“The TCAM 130 evaluates in step 242, whether all the attributes of one of the rules stored in the TCAM 130 match the corresponding attributes of the received data transmission. If this is the case, the TCAM 130 performs the specific action linked with the matching rule and thus particularly allows or denies passing of the data packet through the Ethernet switch to the destination 162 in step 243. If it is evaluated in step 242 that all of the attributes of the received data transmission do not match all of the attributes of one of the rules stored in the TCAM 130, the data transmission is denied in step 244.” [0067]);
reading, by the network processor, detection data from the received data packet in predetermined monitoring positions of the data packet and forming input data for the associative memory from the detection data (“According to a particularly advantageous embodiment, the content addressable memory (CAM) is a ternary content addressable memory (TCAM). By its ability to search itself by content and not by address, the CAM can compare attributes of the received data transmission as input search data against a table of stored data, i.e. stored attributes of data transmissions in the form of stateful firewall rules. By means of a ternary content addressable memory (TCAM) certain attributes of the data transmission can particularly be associated with the "don't care" states of the TCAM.” [0024]);
generating, by the associative memory, an associated hit signal in response to input data when the input data includes the respective data pattern (“Alternatively or additionally, it can be evaluated in step 230 whether a termination request is received, e.g. in the form of a four way handshake according to the TCP. In the course of this four way handshake, one of the two connected network members, especially the source 152, sends a finish flag or finish data packet FIN to the other network member, especially the destination 162. This FIN flag is received at port 150. For example, a stateful firewall rule can be stored in the TCAM 130 corresponding to this FIN data packet and linked with the action to transfer this packet to the CPU 120.” [0072]);
and determining, by the network processor, whether the hit signal results by inputting the input data into the associative memory (“If the data packet is sent to the CPU 120 in step 246, the CPU 120 decides in step 247 whether to allow or to deny the transmission and updates the corresponding rule stored in the TCAM 130 in step 248.” [0070]);
the determining including using the associative memory to detect data packets of a preset packet type and/or with a preset data content, wherein the input data for the associative memory serves for finding a target port and for generating the hit signal by the associative memory, the hit signal indicating that the predetermined data pattern has been recognized, the using the associative memory (“The TCAM 130 evaluates in step 242, whether all the attributes of one of the rules stored in the TCAM 130 match the corresponding attributes of the received data transmission. If this is the case, the TCAM 130 performs the specific action linked with the matching rule and thus particularly allows or denies passing of the data packet through the Ethernet switch to the destination 162 in step 243. If it is evaluated in step 242 that all of the attributes of the received data transmission do not match all of the attributes of one of the rules stored in the TCAM 130, the data transmission is denied in step 244. Afterwards evaluation of the termination condition in step 230 is performed again.” [0067]) comprising: by the network processor correspondingly reading out data for ascertaining the at least one target port from the respective received data packet, reading out detection data in predetermined monitoring positions of the data packet and merging the detection data to further input data for the associative memory, and examining whether the hit signal results by inputting the input data into the associative memory (“If the data packet is sent to the CPU 120 in step 246, the CPU 120 decides in step 247 whether to allow or to deny the transmission and updates the corresponding rule stored in the TCAM 130 in step 248.” [0070]);
determining, by a microprocessor, whether to initiate a predetermined defense routine, the determining including:
indicating, by at least one counter, a respective counter value corresponding to how often the hit signal was generated based on at least two predetermined data (“If the connection is established, a corresponding timeout counter is preferably monitored, particularly by the processor unit.” [0031]);
reading, by the microprocessor, the respectively current analysis data via a data interface (“the processor unit updates the stateful firewall state table about the established connection. Moreover, if the connection is allowed and established, upon receiving a data transmission between the two network members, the CAM compares this received data transmission with a stateful firewall rule from the stateful firewall state table, which is stored in the CAM. Depending on a result of this comparison the received data transmission is allowed or denied or transferred to the processor unit for further evaluation.” [0013]);
determining, by the microprocessor, based on transmission schedule data, which describes an intended transmission scheme of the control devices, by a predetermined comparison routine whether the analysis data deviates from the transmission scheme (“If the connection is allowed and established, the processor unit updates the stateful firewall state table about the established connection. Moreover, if the connection is allowed and established, upon receiving a data transmission between the two network members, the CAM compares this received data transmission with a stateful firewall rule from the stateful firewall state table, which is stored in the CAM. Depending on a result of this comparison the received data transmission is allowed or denied or transferred to the processor unit for further evaluation.” [0013]);
and initiating, by the microprocessor, the predetermined defense routine when the analysis data deviates from the transmission scheme, (“If the connection is allowed and established, the processor unit updates the stateful firewall state table about the established connection. Moreover, if the connection is allowed and established, upon receiving a data transmission between the two network members, the CAM compares this received data transmission with a stateful firewall rule from the stateful firewall state table, which is stored in the CAM. Depending on a result of this comparison the received data transmission is allowed or denied or transferred to the processor unit for further evaluation.” [0013]
and controlling functionality of the motor vehicle in response to the predetermined defense routine comprising restricting functionality of the motor vehicle (“In the following an example will be described that the ECU 152 controlling the entertainment system of the vehicle communicates with the external server 162. For safety reasons only a request of the ECU 152 to establish a connection between itself and the external server 162 can be allowed according to a specific rule of the state table. However, a request of the server 162 to establish a connection with the CPU 152 must be denied according to a specific rule of the state table.” [0051]).
Shukla does not explicitly teach storing, in a readout memory, analysis data including the respective last data packet, the counter value, and a timestamp of the respectively last increase of the counter value for each of the at least one counter (C).
However, Oren does teach storing, in a readout memory, analysis data including the respective last data packet, the counter value, and a timestamp of the respectively last increase of the counter value for each of the at least one counter (C) (“This key is then used to perform a lookup operation in the TCAM. If there is a hit (e.g., a found condition), then byte, packet, and/or other counters, and possibly timestamp information are updated in a parallel SRAM for this entry. If there is a miss (e.g., a not found condition), then a new entry is added to the TCAM. If the number of free entries falls below a certain threshold, then an “old” entry is flushed.” [Col.5 ln 25-40]). Both Shukla and Oren teach methods for monitoring and processing vehicle component data. However, only Oren explicitly teaches storing, in a readout memory, analysis data including the respective last data packet, the counter value, and a timestamp of the respectively last increase of the counter value for each of the at least one counter (C).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the data monitoring method of Shukla to also include storing, in a readout memory, analysis data including the respective last data packet, the counter value, and a timestamp of the respectively last increase of the counter value for each of the at least one counter (C), as in Oren. Doing so improves the vehicle component data processing (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Oren, Col. 1]).
wherein the hit signal is generated and the counter value is incremented when any one of the two predetermined data patterns is recognized by the associative memory (“Associative memory 110 performs a lookup operation on a receive item 107 to generate a result 113, which typically includes a hit indication (e.g., found or not found) and possibly an identification value of the successful match. Control logic 100 receives an indication of result 113, and if the item 107 was not found in the entries of associative memory 110, control logic 100 adds an entry corresponding to item 107 and initializes a corresponding location in memory 115 to identify a particular counter (e.g., a physical counter, memory location, other counting method or mechanism, etc.) within statistics mechanism 120, and possibly initializes this particular counter within counting mechanism 120 to zero, one, or some other number of counting units (e.g., packets, bytes, bits, any possible unit, etc) If, however, item 107 was matched in associative memory 110, then a read operation is performed on memory” [Col.6 ln 1-20]). Both Shukla and Oren teach methods for monitoring and processing vehicle component data. However, only Oren explicitly teaches wherein the hit signal is generated and the counter value is incremented when any one of the two predetermined data patterns is recognized by the associative memory.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the data monitoring method of Shukla to also include wherein the hit signal is generated and the counter value is incremented when any one of the two predetermined data patterns is recognized by the associative memory, as in Oren. Doing so improves the vehicle component data processing (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Oren, Col. 6]).
Regarding claims 11, 26 and 29, Shukla discloses The method according to claim 10,
Shukla does not explicitly teach wherein at least one counter counts the hit signals for at least two data patterns.
However, Oren does teach wherein at least one counter counts the hit signals for at least two data patterns (“Associative memory 110 performs a lookup operation on a receive item 107 to generate a result 113, which typically includes a hit indication (e.g., found or not found) and possibly an identification value of the successful match. Control logic 100 receives an indication of result 113, and if the item 107 was not found in the entries of associative memory 110, control logic 100 adds an entry corresponding to item 107 and initializes a corresponding location in memory 115 to identify a particular counter (e.g., a physical counter, memory location, other counting method or mechanism, etc.) within statistics mechanism 120, and possibly initializes this particular counter within counting mechanism 120 to zero, one, or some other number of counting units (e.g., packets, bytes, bits, any possible unit, etc) If, however, item 107 was matched in associative memory 110, then a read operation is performed on memory” [Col.6 ln 1-20]). Both Shukla and Oren teach methods for monitoring and processing vehicle component data. However, only Oren explicitly teaches wherein at least one counter (C) counts the hit signals for at least two data patterns.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the data monitoring method of Shukla to also include wherein at least one counter (C) counts the hit signals for at least two data patterns, as in Oren. Doing so improves the vehicle component data processing (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Oren, Col. 1]).
Regarding claims 12, 13 and 27, Shukla discloses The method according to claim 10,
Shukla does not explicitly teach wherein the respective counter value of the at least one counter (C) is reset by the network processor and/or the microprocessor when a predetermined reset condition is satisfied.
However, Oren does teach wherein the respective counter value of the at least one counter (C) is reset by the network processor and/or the microprocessor when a predetermined reset condition is satisfied (“Associative memory 110 performs a lookup operation on a receive item 107 to generate a result 113, which typically includes a hit indication (e.g., found or not found) and possibly an identification value of the successful match. Control logic 100 receives an indication of result 113, and if the item 107 was not found in the entries of associative memory 110, control logic 100 adds an entry corresponding to item 107 and initializes a corresponding location in memory 115 to identify a particular counter (e.g., a physical counter, memory location, other counting method or mechanism, etc.) within statistics mechanism 120, and possibly initializes this particular counter within counting mechanism 120 to zero, one, or some other number of counting units (e.g., packets, bytes, bits, any possible unit, etc) If, however, item 107 was matched in associative memory 110, then a read operation is performed on memory” [Col.6 ln 1-20] and (“Otherwise, as determined in process block 604, if a timer has expired, then the timer is reset in process block 606, and processing also proceeds to process block 608. In process block 608, one or more of the entries are flushed from the dynamic set of entries which includes collecting corresponding statistics from the statistics mechanism. In one embodiment, flushing some of the dynamic entries includes retrieving their corresponding statistics values and removing their corresponding entries from a content-addressable memory (and possibly adjunct memory). In one embodiment, flushing some of the dynamic entries also includes only retrieving their corresponding statistics values to avoid of an overflow condition of a statistics element in response to, or based on a particular condition, such as but not limited to the expiration of a timer.” [Col.7 ln 22-40]). Both Shukla and Oren teach methods for monitoring and processing vehicle component data. However, only Oren explicitly teaches wherein the respective counter value of the at least one counter (C) is reset by the network processor and/or the microprocessor when a predetermined reset condition is satisfied.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the data monitoring method of Shukla to also include wherein the respective counter value of the at least one counter (C) is reset by the network processor and/or the microprocessor when a predetermined reset condition is satisfied, as in Oren. Doing so improves the vehicle component data processing (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Oren, Col. 1]).
Regarding claims 14-17, Shukla discloses The method according to claim 10, wherein multiple datasets for different monitoring positions are provided and a packet characteristic of the respective data packet is ascertained by the network processor based on the data packet, and one of the datasets is selected depending on the packet characteristic and the detection data is read out in the monitoring positions, which are indicated by the selected dataset (“Particularly, a stateful firewall monitors incoming and outgoing data, data units or data packets over time, as well as the state of a connection between network members, and stores this information in a dynamic state table.” [0009]).
Regarding claim 18, Shukla discloses The method according to claim 14, wherein the packet characteristic indicates a protocol type and/or a packet type and/or a data content (“Moreover, information about the specific connection between these two network members can be provided as attributes like a communication protocol (e.g. TCP, UDP, ICMP) used for the connection and/or a state flag set by the corresponding communication protocol.” [0027]).
Regarding claims 19-22, Shukla discloses The method according to claim 10,
Shukla does not explicitly teach wherein the monitoring positions describe disjunct data fields of the data packet.
However, Oren does teach wherein the monitoring positions describe disjunct data fields of the data packet (“In one embodiment, packets 103 are received by packet processor 105. In addition to other operations (e.g., packet routing, security, etc.), packet processor 105 typically generates one or more items, including, but not limited to one or more netflow identifiers (typically referred to herein as “netflows”) based on one or more fields of one or more of the received packets 103 and possibly from information stored in data structures or acquired from other sources.” [Col.5 ln 47-67]). Both Shukla and Oren teach methods for monitoring and processing vehicle component data. However, only Oren explicitly teaches wherein the monitoring positions describe disjunct data fields of the data packet.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the data monitoring method of Shukla to also include wherein the monitoring positions describe disjunct data fields of the data packet, as in Oren. Doing so improves the vehicle component data processing (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Oren, Col. 1]).
Regarding claims 23-24, Shukla discloses The method according to claim 10, wherein forming the input data includes that the detection data is rearranged by a shift operation and/or is combined by at least one combination rule (“According to a particularly advantageous embodiment, the content addressable memory (CAM) is a ternary content addressable memory (TCAM). By its ability to search itself by content and not by address, the CAM can compare attributes of the received data transmission as input search data against a table of stored data, i.e. stored attributes of data transmissions in the form of stateful firewall rules. By means of a ternary content addressable memory (TCAM) certain attributes of the data transmission can particularly be associated with the "don't care" states of the TCAM.” [0024]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED ALKIRSH whose telephone number is (703) 756-4503. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am-5:00 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FADEY JABR can be reached on (571) 272-1516. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AA/Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668